@d4nimal You're right, but its also the fact that the watch have rather thin bezels which gives the watch a bigger looking appearance.

My wrists are small coming in at 6 inches.

I think they both work, actually. It depends what you're looking for: the smaller one is plenty big enough for a dress watch. It's in perfect proportion to your wrist, and I wear a 35mm watch with a suit even though my wrist is 7"+. Belligero's a giant and he wears watches that size, too. It's a classy piece under your shirt cuff, very subtle and dignified.

But. If you're looking for something more casual and modern-looking, that could still fly with a suit and tie, especially if you're a younger guy with a more fashion-forward style, then the bigger one is fine: it's slightly more in-your-face and oversized, but it's not silly on your wrist at all. It's just a lot more show.

So really, there's no wrong answer. Think of the image you want to project with it, and choose accordingly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by add911_11

That thing looks like you could beat someone to death with it. In a good way. Nice shot.

Well the GMTII didn't work out. The pre-owned one that I was hoping to make a deal on had been noticeably polished. I did find a new one at an AD and liked it okay but not enough to kop. Against my better judgment I tried on my grail but the deal I was offered was $10k+ more than the price from my gray market source, and then taxes on top of that. The half bottle of wine I had in me was not enough to take that bullet. Anyways, after sleeping on it a couple of nights and being prodded by my wife to just "stop obsessing and buy the damn thing already," I think I am going to kop. The only question is from where.

I am having lunch tomorrow with my next door neighbor who owns an AD. When I first met him at his housewarming party he told me that if I ever needed anything he would take care of me. I don't know if he meant take care of me in the sense he could get it for me, or in the sense he could give me a very good price. Lol. Guess we will find out. I value the friendship so I'm not inclined to negotiate.

@TC (Houston) , I look forward to a vicarious kop event imminently, but a piece of advice: negotiate, even if you're friends. The bottom line is..er...your bottom line. He's a businessman, and you're a customer. He wants to sell you that watch. And even with a good deal, he will make money. But as a wealthy friend of mine once told me, "get over yourself". I was having issues with asking for the day rate I wanted to do some work for them - my first foray into consulting, and I suppose in British culture, talking about money feels crude. But this is a commercial transaction, and I don't think you're being at all unfriendly if you say you're naturally looking for the best price, and when you find it, you hope he can get close to matching it because you'd like to buy from a friend.

It was interesting to me. Of course, it's old, and maybe some processes have improved. But there is also a whiff of reality there: Rolex don't fuss about the beauty of their movements, and keep them hidden. And with a million watches a year (way more than when this was written), I'm sure it's even more true now that they will minimise the number of parts, simplify processes, and maximise commonality of components while keeping each of them as cheap as possible. Such is the business of major industrial production which, there is no doubt, is the business Rolex are in. That doesn't mean they're bad, any more than Sony or Mercedes Benz are bad. But they're not an exclusive, artisanal product either. I think his detailed observations are harsh in isolation, but overall, surely he has a point?

Which is this: just like Omega, or IWC, or even Hublot, Rolex spends massively on marketing. Their pruning of dealerships and increasingly intense protection of their pricing over recent years, has also been part of the same picture: with so much fierce competition, maintaining their position as both huge and exclusive, costs a lot of dough. As the writer said, there is no doubt that the watches work well - perhaps the most important thing in maintaining their respectable and admired status, and a massive achievement considering their production scale. But that doesn't change the fact that their marketing could well be more expensive than making their movements.

Most people on this thread love Rolex. There are several that I'd love to own myself, and at some point I have no doubt that at least one of them will be on my wrist. That doesn't mean it's wrong to say that we're paying for the brand as much as what's in it: the value proposition is very different from, say, Moser above: they will both work, but with one we're paying for beauty and romance, and the other, a rather more obvious form of status. Every time I see Rolex-sponsored golf updates on TV, or tennis tournaments, or clocks all over an airport, that is abundantly clear. It doesn't make it bad. But it's no less a fact that we are paying for the fluff with Rolex, than if it were the fifty-seventh moon watch or a Galapagos-saving special IWC Aquatimer.

Much of what you say is true, but I can still do without reviews such as Odetts. It's a poor piece of work IMO.

One space after a full stop (what most of you call a period). Yes please

Still, it's nothing to get worked up over. There are more pressing issues out there. Misuse of the phrase "begs the question" to mean "raises the question", for one example among many.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mimo

I think they both work, actually. It depends what you're looking for: the smaller one is plenty big enough for a dress watch. It's in perfect proportion to your wrist, and I wear a 35mm watch with a suit even though my wrist is 7"+. Belligero's a giant and he wears watches that size, too.[...]

That's right! In fact, my newest arrival is around 35 mm. Even though the interwebs assure me that such a thing is strictly for wimps and Communists, I don't mind having a simple, chilled-out watch:

Despite the constant taunts of those emboldened by their macho watches, one thing that I appreciate is that the less-bulky profile isn't as prone to getting snagged in the beards of my giant enemies when we're having a disagreement:

(That's me on the right.)

Here's another one that, at a mere 38 mm, is no doubt hopelessly undersized for my 200 mm / 7 7/8" wrist:

Anyway, I agree that the Junghans in 34 mm looks better-proportioned in those photos than the 38 mm, especially considering that the dial comprises about 37.5 of them. Good call on going no-date either way; I much prefer that version for the Max Bill. But this stuff is subjective and that's just my opinion.